Fitzgerald fit - again

runbabarun

Ok got it! Run slow to build endurance, develop your muscles and circulation, so you can run a faster marathon.

My program by a non-Fitzgerald (so-called) expert --gulp-- (Bobby McGee) says the same things. Train at aerobic zone for 4-5 days a week, and one or two quality runs- which works out roughly to the -what else?- 80/20 ratio. BUT in one of the explanation bits, he says, "if you're feeling strong, you can do these runs at aerobic threshold, if you get tired slow it down" What?

runbabarun

(This stupid app cut it off, adding the next bit here.)

I feel I've been training at AeT and improving. Started shooting for 9 min miles, now easily pulling 15 milers at 8:30 with energy to spare at the end. Running about 45-48 miles/wk.

Question is, should I be worried? FYI, I'm in week 6 of an 18 week marathon program, age 40, and have lots of grey hair.

5512bf

Your threshold pace is what you could race for 1 hour. A 15 mile run at 8:30 is quite a bit longer than a hour, so this is not your theshold. Getting your proper training zones set takes some time and guess work unless you get a bloodlactic test done somewhere. You should probably do a half marathon time trial and plug that into a Daniels calculator to get a better idea of some training zones.

runbabarun

@5512bf thank you. Here is my confusion: I did the 30 min effort pace test with a monitor today. According to the McGee book, my Threshold pace is around 8:10 and threshold HR is 147 . He advises staying under threshold Hr (at aerobic level) for most runs. But if I run at 8:10, my heart rate will end up somewhere higher than that (my max is 190)
As I said I think I could pull off long runs around 8:15-8:30 pace and I seem to have a decent (but developing) base at this point. Is the idea to stick with the pace threshold nevertheless? As I work at it, will there be a *grand alignment* of pace and Hr thresholds?

5512bf

If you are running 2 hours at 8:30 then 8:10 should probably be closer to a race pace for your marathon, if not as bit faster if your are still fresh when its over. That is most likely no where near theshold. Do you have a recent 5k/10k/ half marathon time? I'm 43 and my threshold is closer to 166 with 144 being my transition from z2 to z3. That 70-75% number also is what most authors consider an easy pace, not threshold. I'd bet you are under estimating your threshold by a ton.

runbabarun

Today's 5k portion of the run was 21:50 and my best time in 3 years- so I'm going with that. You are right, I may have been running slower than I needed to. Things will get interesting.

runbabarun

Thabksnagain!

STrooper

Variations on a theme.

One of the things that happens is the improvement and moving targets as you train. This isn't a bad thing. The way it translates is what seems difficult at the beginning gets easier towards the end.

So, let me put this out there for comparison:

Resting HR = 47 bpm
Max HR = 190 (note I've actually raced with a higher max at the end of a couple of races, but that value near 200 bpm is a little scary at my age)

Zone 1 = 89-145 bpm
Zone 2 = 145-161 bpm
Zone 3 = 161-168 bpm
Zone 4 = 168-179 bpm
LTHR = 178 bpm
Zone 5 = 179-190 bpm

What is typical of my Zone 3 running is somewhere between 8:25-8:55/mile. When I started three years ago, it was closer to 11:15-11:30 (according to my HR data).

The HR/GPS data also suggests the following pace ranges (for me) for each zone:

Zone 1 = 10:30 - 12:00/mile
Zone 2 = 9:30 - 10:30/mile
Zone 3 = 8:30 - 9:30/mile
Zone 4 = 7:30 - 8:30/mile
Zone 5 = 6:30 - 7:30/mile

Although these are fairly wide pace ranges, they sound about right for me. Part of that comes with experience. BTW, the zone settings come from that sustained, maximum output 30-minute run (which I usually do on a track so that I check that my lap times stay very consistent or I can see how much of a dropoff I might get towards the end).

YMMV!

5512bf

I just had a blood lactic test done on a treadmill yesterday. I'm 43, running 3 years with max HR at 200, typically only achieving that in all out short intervals. Our 5k times are probably about even, I haven't run an actually 5k race in almost 2 years but run my mile repeats typically 3x1600 at 6:55-7:00 pushing 180 BPM towards the end.

These were the results of the test.

Zone 2: HR 120-139
Zone 3: HR 140-169
Zone 4: HR 170-174. LT HR: 172
Zone 5: HR 175+

My trainer uses a little bit different formula for z2/z3 than Fitzgerald. My recovery runs and cross training are Z2 using this chart and most training runs are in the lower of z3. My z3 is much wider that @STrooper because of this. Using Fitz perceived effort guesstimates my z2 would be 120-155ish and z3 156-169. My trainer actually wants my HR on my middle distance runs of 10-15 miles to get close to or slightly over 150 towards the end with a pace of about 9:25-9:35 in summer heat. The average HR for the entire run is typically in the high 130's to mid 140's.

My goal MP is 8:55-9:00 but it's looking like that might get closer to 8:35-8:45 by the time October rolls around. Trainer seems to think I should be able to maintain 155-160 BPM for the first 20 miles given good running conditions.

runbabarun

@STrooper and @5512bf. Thank you very much for these insights. Incredibly helpful. It seems that I need to slow down enough and stay at Zone 3 as much as possible but the top range is a bit higher than I thought. I am also playing in the 48 min-190 max zone and so some of these data you shared give me a more specific idea. I think @MobyCarp had suggested that first half of the marathon should feel like you have not even run it. To be able to achieve that, I need to be able to train myself to stay in that aerobic zone as much as possible. Last weekend I did a 17 mile run to test myself going by average pace, and it just wasn't productive. This was intentional because I wanted to see how my body reacts. If it went well I was going to use it as evidence that pace base training could work for further training.

Was I wrong? Compared to the 15 miler a week before, it was way too taxing and I had a taste of unnecessary exhaustion, just for the sake of 20 secs per mile faster average. I have a feeling that, if I can get into a better discipline and stay with a conscious negative split strategy, I will be able to make this time up in a race situation. Will see.

Thanks again for your help! Really enlightening specific examples.

STrooper

@runbabarun. There are lots of factors to consider when one run "goes wrong" or feels unproductive compared to another run of a somewhat shorter distance. We attempt to do things in much the same way each time to minimize the number of variable factors. But sometimes we just don't get it right.

And sometimes cumulative factors suddenly pile up in a way that it makes one particular longish run the Run To Hell. Most of the time, just a bit more water and slowing down a little bit is all it takes to right a run that's not going well. It's usually the next long run that signals whether we are on the right track or whether we have to fall back and regroup a bit more.

But one thing I can say is that since I've been more dedicated to the premise of aerobic and anaerobic runs not being mixed (thanks to Fitzgerald), not only has the training gone better, but so has the overall performance.

Vladimirnapkin

Man, I miss those high max heart rates! I hit 197 in a VO2MAX test back in my early 40s, and would get over 180 in race conditions. 10 years later, 172 is the highest I've seen all year.